The Gulch is still there
For all those who may remember way back when, I posited this as a possible Gulch site. It is still there and the last offer was at US$700 per acre. The way things are going, we probably need to be far away. Far, far away.
I have a complete plan for building a Gulch, on paper. For those opining for a place, here you are.
I have a complete plan for building a Gulch, on paper. For those opining for a place, here you are.
SOURCE URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mELRqfL52QU
https://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/re...
Even in comparison to its Pacific neighbours, private gun ownership in Fiji is uncommon, at a rate of one lawfully held firearm for every 550 people. Civilian gun owners must be licensed, and their weapons individually registered. Private firearms are restricted to hunting, sport shooting and arms collecting. Handguns, assault weapons and automatic firearms are prohibited, with safe storage of all small arms and ammunition required by law.
In stark contrast to most nations, the number of small arms in civilian hands in Fiji is dwarfed by the arsenal available to military and police personnel. With the largest army per capita in the south west Pacific, Fiji has a history of political and ethnic unrest. From 1987 to 2006, the nation suffered four armed coups d'état, and remains under military rule.
Fiji prohibits civilian possession of automatic weapons, and of firearms with a barrel length less than 24 inches (61cm).1 A pistol is defined as a firearm whose barrel length is less than nine inches (22cm).2
In 2001-02 there were 1,465 licensed civilian gun owners, with 1,538 registered firearms, most of them shotguns.3 4 This is one of the lowest firearm possession rates (0.18 per 100 people) in the Pacific. Of these 1,538 registered guns, 63 per cent were in the hands of ethnic minority Indo-Fijians, while 19 per cent were owned by indigenous Fijians.5 When unregistered, illicit firearms are taken into account, including those small arms diverted from state stockpiles during political unrest, about 4,000 guns are estimated to be in private hands, for a possession rate of 0.5 per 100 population."
-----------------------------------------
I see no way to defend the property from anyone who wants to take it.
Texas secession is more likely, imo.
All of that for a few hundred dollars per acre. Wow!
Instead corruption grew and the wealthy who should have recognized the need and funded it became more corrupt and betrayed their country.
I wish that FL was safe from the Democrat socialist monsters. I'd buy a piece of land and build a dome or two. It may be better to take my limited assets farther south if the socialists take control again.
a) anonymity (as in AS)
b) very strong and infinitely reliable allies
c) very strong defensive or MAD weapons
imo, a and b are not likely and c is very expensive
We could inundate Texas with Gulchers and then declare independence when things come apart. The State constitution gives it the right to secede and return to being an independent country.
With all the infrastructure needed to get it started, the controlling regime that could take control as soon as the improvements are made, the remote location, the asking price of $700/acre is quite high.
Then there is the question of any existing residents or claims to the property by indigenous people, claims to mineral rights, and the prevailing laws if any claims occur.
As to the other caveats, the land is conveyed in fee simple other than restricted to the foreshore rights, which can be negotiated.
To a chemical engineer like me, Beaumont is an historic site!